…inside of ADX Florence for a period no shorter than the remainder of his natural life?

I think these are pretty valid concerns. I never imagined we’d need fucking sharpshooters on top of county buildings so they could count ballots safely. It does seem like some of the more contested areas are taking some precautions, I really hope we’re wrong and everything goes smoothly.

I was going to bury this lower in the thread but I think this deserves a top line reply.

she could literally just pay lip service the day of the election where it can do the least amount of damage when it comes to moderate voters and that would gain the support of people like me; but she won’t

So let’s make this perfectly clear for everyone else: this person would sacrifice the rights of women/people of color/lgbtq+ people, accelerate genocide in Gaza/Ukraine/elsewhere, and completely doom any action on climate change… because they want lip service on an issue they don’t actually care about. Wonder why that is?

In the off years work to make changes and organize, most people ignore the second part.

And for some strange reason, some of the regular commenters here actively oppose this part in favor of telling us the solution is to let the GOP gain power and “send a message to the Democrats”.

Billionaires are the biggest “welfare queens” out there. Everything they have is stolen or a handout.

Yeah there is no “well I’m in a blue state so I’m gonna vote 3rd party to voice my displeasure with Democrats” this time. It’s all hands on deck.

This shift is because we need the GOP to vote for anything that gets passed. They will not vote for a pathway to citizenship. They will not vote to protect DACA recipients. They will not vote to do the things that actually need to be done, that Democrats have proposed. So the only thing leftover is enforcement measures, some of which are still needed.

Doing nothing is acceptable to the GOP and they have the votes to make that happen. We need to get rid of them, that’s the solution here.

But would a Harris administration look significantly different than a second Trump administration?

Even assembling these words together makes me doubt anything the author could possibly have to say. Yeesh.

I mean, Liz Cheney is right there…

Okay we’re just going to have to agree to disagree then.

Either way, let’s do what we can to push the odds further in her favor, even if you don’t think she’s going to do it herself. I’ll be out canvassing again on Saturday, lots of time to win this thing!

So then how many votes do you think she loses from a pivot? How many percentage points? I fully accept that she will gain votes from a segment of the base that may not vote for her otherwise. I am not arguing that at all. I want to know about the other piece you say youve laid out. You’ve presented all the data, walk us through that piece…

Texas will let you vote without an ID but you have to provide proof of residency, sign an attestation that says you can’t reasonable acquire an ID, and you can fill out a provisional ballot.

…and then they’ll throw it out.

/s kinda

Go find the data and show me there is a political cost to a pivot, because I’ve provided data to say there isn’t, and in-fact, not pivoting is costing her the election.

You provided half the data and are trying to get people to draw meaningful conclusions about it, while refusing to even acknowledge you’re working with incomplete data.

I’m just confused why you think you can lay out exactly half of the equation, know that you’re not presenting the whole picture, and say with certainty that the data proves you correct.

Because thats what the data have to say. That’s why we think that.

So what is the percentage of voters that she will lose with a pivot? Not the ones she might gain, who does she lose? And what does it do to GOP turnout estimates?

You’re completely ignoring that by changing her position, she can gain votes with one group, and lose votes with another. What you and the data you’re using haven’t done is prove that the former is greater than the latter. It seems pretty apparent to me that the army of data scientists that the Harris campaign is listening to is telling her it’s not.

I don’t know why we’re assuming that she picks up more votes than she loses by making a pivot on Israel. Not only will she lose votes from other areas of the base, that pivot will drive turnout among the GOP base. 5% means nothing if they lose 5% from Christians/Jews and turn out all the Christian crazies for the GOP.

Unfortunately I think the Harris campaign is doing the right thing with Israel right now. If other people on the left think this issue is worth losing over, I simply disagree. I don’t think there’s a good answer where everyone is happy, just one with less dead Palestinians.

The only answer here that works is a pivot from Kamala.

That’s the only answer you want. That’s not the only answer that works.

Okay, if we’re just going to play make believe I’m good. I hope you sober up or something, you’re usually not this obstinate for no reason. Maybe PR is a soft spot for some reason. Idk. I’m good though. Have a good one!

A territory of the US. You know, the thing it is. I don’t understand why you’re trying to redefine the word country to not admit you’re wrong. It doesn’t even buttress your point, it’s just a weird hill you are dying on for no reason.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I need to change my mailing address because apparently I live in the country of the USA, the country of Colorado, and the country of the city I live in. All of which have areas of land with a government.

I gotta admit, I only replied because I was curious how long they would keep it up. I don’t consider Rapid a troll or bad faith most of the time, so this is disappointing. They very clearly just don’t want to admit that they are straight up incorrect, regardless of whatever point they’re trying to make.

I’ve made no claim here. I’m happy to answer your question once you finish justifying your underlying claim.